Appeal No. 2006-0109 Παγε 3
Application No. 10/350,187
respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
Each of appellant’s claims on appeal recites a method, or a program for carrying
out a method, comprising steps of adjusting a first continuously shiftable parameter so
that at least one condition variable of the combustion of a combustion chamber
assigned to said inlet valve does not change when later switching over a second
parameter which can be switched in steps and then switching over said second
parameter. In rejecting claims 1-3, 6 and 9-12 as being anticipated by Kabasin, the
examiner reads the phasing of the intake cam relative to the engine crankshaft as the
first, continuously shiftable, parameter and the position of the two-step switching device
as the second parameter. With the two-step switching device in the first position, an
associated engine valve is actuated, i.e., lifted, according to a high-lift cam. With the
two-step switching device in the second position, the associated engine valve is
actuated/lifted according to a low-lift cam of the camshaft.
It is apparent from the disclosure of Kabasin in columns 9 through 12 that the
phasing will be switched before the two-step switching device in at least two situations.
First, in the case where the load check 204 and high-lift position check 206 determine
that the two-step switching device needs to be switched to the high-lift position, if the
high-load hysteresis check 212 determines that the desired load is less than the
predetermined high-load hysteresis threshold1, the electronic throttle control module
1 The predetermined high-load hysteresis threshold is slightly greater than the predetermined load
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007